Cure for Cancer

[kach22i]

Molecule holds cancer hope

January 16, 2007

Joseph Hall
Staff Reporter

A molecule used for decades to combat metabolic diseases in children, may soon be available as an effective treatment for many forms of cancer, University of Alberta researchers are reporting.

In results that “astounded” school scientists, the molecule, known as DCA, was shown to shrink lung, breast and brain tumours in both animal and human tissue experiments. The study is being published today in the journal Cancer Cell.

“I think DCA can be selective for cancer because it attacks a fundamental process of cancer that is unique to cancer cells,” says Dr. Evangelos Michelakis, a professor in the Edmonton university’s medical school and a key study author.

In particular, Michelakis says, the molecule appears to repair the damage cancers can cause to mitochondria, the intercellular structures that normally convert food into energy. Located in the cell’s cytoplasm, outside its nucleus, critical mitochondrial functions can be suppressed in cancerous cells.

“Cancer cells actively suppress their mitochondria, which alters their metabolism and this appears to offer cancer cells a significant advantage in growth compared to normal cells,” Michelakis said in a news release on the study.

Cancer cells bypass mitochondrial energy production, instead using intense glucose conversion to feed themselves, lead study author Sebastien Bonnet said in an interview.

But because mitochondria also regulate cell death, their alteration can make the cancer cells far harder to kill off.

“When a cell is getting too old or doesn’t function properly, the mitochondria are going to induce the cell death,” says Bonnet, a postdoctoral fellow at the university.

“In cancer, because the mitochondria are not working properly…the cancer cells cannot die, they just keep going and keep going and keep going.”

Bonnet says DCA - or dichloroacetate - appears able to reverse the mitochondrial changes in a wide range of cancers, making the malignant cells more vulnerable to normal death programming.

Until recently, researchers believed the damage to mitochondria in cancer cells was permanent. But DCA, which activates a critical enzyme, was shown to reverse the damage and restore normal functions in many cancers.

Bonnet says DCA may also provide an effective cancer treatment because it is easily absorbed - ensuring it can reach areas that other drugs cannot.

Brain tumours, for example, are notoriously hard to treat with chemotherapies.

As well, because it’s been used to combat other ailments - like lactic acid build-up in children and heart ischemia --Bonnet says DCA has been shown to have few toxic effects. As well, he says, its previous use in for other diseases means it can be immediately tested on human cancer patients.

Unlike other cancer drugs, DCA did not appear to have any negative effect on normal cells.

A manufactured molecule, DCA is widely available at “every chemistry store”, Bonnet says. And, because it is not patented by a pharmaceutical company, it could provide an extremely inexpensive cancer therapy.

“To treat the rats (in lab experiments) one dose of DCA is 0.7 cents per day per rat,” he says.

That would translate into “pennies a day” in human trials and treatments.

[Chocaholic]

The cynic in me says that drug powerhouses will make this story disappear fast. Too much money to be made with traditional therapy.

The optimist in me says that this is incredible news and it could make medical history.

The pessimist in me says that it'll fall flat on it's face in organized trials and will give false hope to terminal patients.

The realist in me doesn't know what to think any more!

[pwd72s]

I agree...if it were true, it would be front page news, not first read about on a car group off topic board...So, guess I'm a pessimist. But hey, what do I know? Thinking the colts were toast, I stopped watching yesterday's game...

[HardDrive]

American drug companies don't control the whole planet.

They might be able to influence the FDA, but that would not stop foreign countries from developing the technology.

[Christien]

Well, maybe not front page news, but that article is from Jan. 16's Toronto Star, not exactly a small-town 2 page paper.

While drug companies do fund research in Canada, they don't have anywhere near the death-grip here that they do on the health care industry in the US. When there's a development in cure to the cause of 50% of deaths in a gov't-funded health care system, you can bet your ass the gov't will get behind it. That's the exact reason the anti-tobacco lobby is so strong here.

[masraum]

+1

Originally posted by Chocaholic
The cynic in me says that drug powerhouses will make this story disappear fast. Too much money to be made with traditional therapy.

The optimist in me says that this is incredible news and it could make medical history.

The pessimist in me says that it'll fall flat on it's face in organized trials and will give false hope to terminal patients.

The realist in me doesn't know what to think any more!

[arcsine]

As a long time big pharma and biotech researcher I would read this with healthy skepticism.

Why?
Mice are not humans.
Human tissue in a lab is a not a human being.
Dichloroacetate (DCA) would be a non-specific small molecule therapy and it would be beyond surprising if it had the clinical efficacy intimated in the article.
Lots of magic cures have come and gone for any number of reasons. This one reeks of snake oil.

Any big pharma would snap up and market the daylights out of a curative cancer therapy, even a cheap one as this implies. The public goodwill alone would be worth it.

[Nathans_Dad]

The poor image of "Big Drug" continues to amaze me. These companies bring drugs to market that have extended the lives of millions of people and somehow they still are made out to be the bad guy.

Simple solution. You don't like "Big Drug", stop taking medications.

P.S. If this is viable in humans, you can bet that "Big Drug" will beat down the door to get it to market.

[Porsche-O-Phile]

Have to agree. The money is in TREATMENTS, not cures. Very little R&D on cures, quite a bit on treatments.

Of course the Europeans will market it and it'll be available as a cure in the rest of the world within 10 years.

[Nathans_Dad]

Originally posted by Porsche-O-Phile
Have to agree. The money is in TREATMENTS, not cures. Very little R&D on cures, quite a bit on treatments.

Of course the Europeans will market it and it'll be available as a cure in the rest of the world within 10 years.

P-o-P with all due respect:

"Jane, you ignorant slut."

There is very little in medicine that can be "cured". Most of the cures fall into the surgical realm. If you can't cut it out, it's tough to "cure" it. An exception I can think of right now is acute leukemia, mostly in kids. Some forms of lymphoma respond very well to treatment as well.

Cures are hard to come by. But don't let reality change your opinion.

[legion]

And I thought this thread would be about Chuck Norris' tears.

[berettafan]

Originally posted by Nathans_Dad
The poor image of "Big Drug" continues to amaze me. These companies bring drugs to market that have extended the lives of millions of people and somehow they still are made out to be the bad guy.

Simple solution. You don't like "Big Drug", stop taking medications.

P.S. If this is viable in humans, you can bet that "Big Drug" will beat down the door to get it to market.

Recently ran into a girl i used to wait tables with. Very cute, VERY flirty and not terribly bright. She earned $100k last year as a drug rep. total compensation pkg was probably close to $125k.

She covers a relatively small, mostly rural area.

Tell me how it's in the publics best interest that many of my small business clients can't afford health insurance but she earns triple the average wage in our area flirting with docs to sell meds.

Funny thing is when i read the first post i thought 'this would be looked at carefully in Canada since the gov't has an interest in the health system; here it would get lost in the 'hillary is running' headlines.'

[Overpaid Slacker]

Originally posted by legion
And I thought this thread would be about Chuck Norris' tears.

But, he's never cried. Too bad.

BTW, if you work in an office with Chuck Norris, never, ever ask him for his three hole punch.

JP

[berettafan]

okay okay can somebody please link the Chuck Norris stuff!